WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] /proc/xen/xenbus supports watch?

To: Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] /proc/xen/xenbus supports watch?
From: Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 08:33:38 +0100
Cc: xen-devel List <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Christian Limpach <Christian.Limpach@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 07:26:26 +0000
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1127716571.9596.50.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <d7335251fd831e43f944d94e22da3878@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <1127214064.2656.45.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <152436486e4a36af94a87ad6d40a768e@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <1127354853.7567.6.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <b5423e9d922e98b290db80ff4d0cba9c@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <1127429689.2722.2.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <785f15905bfe17d87d6bd0eb878cc166@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <1127618982.796.71.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <39daa0554066842da8701a90d9f01386@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <4318f53c57216e19ba81c096b4a0c849@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050925185529.GW9610@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <1127716571.9596.50.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On 26 Sep 2005, at 07:36, Rusty Russell wrote:

Since we
need to add some kind of transaction identifier to the interface
to support this, we should make this change now.

Or, alternately, since we don't need it, we shouldn't.

Holding xenbus_lock even across kernel transactions is undesirable if we can avoid it, I think. Remind me again why mux/demux is harder or more code than spawning multiple pages per domain? Both approaches require extra code to be written after all, and it's not clear to me that the extra code required in xenstored for mux/demux is very much or particularly tricky to write.

 -- Keir


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel